I have a 3D game comparison (hopefully will be a database someday) and am impressed with the 3D engine database but think it needs to be presented/outputted better to more easily compare engines:

List the engines in tabular form (like my comparison table) without cluttering up each engine in blocks, making it hard to navigate (use letters instead of numbers for pages, too). Each engine could be clicked to see its full info, if desired.

Add checkboxes to select multiple features (and engines) at a time instead of just one and having the essentually useless block listing as described above.

Add commonly used descriptions to the selection fields instead of similarly-worded phrases: add "WYSIWYG" to editor list, for example.

I wouldn't mind linking to this database from my 3D game comparison but the data needs to be formatted better to easily compare multiple engines. Perhaps we could merge our content, too, or at least share info to complement each other...

Methulah
—
2006-03-05T11:49:45Z —
#2

I don't think that engine comparison is the name of the game here (pardon the irrelivant pun). The function of the 3D engine database is the provide people who are looking for an engine with certan features, that engine. It is the finest resource of its kind on the internet and I personally like it the way it is.

However I would like the ability to add a bit of formatting to my reviews? Anyone?

Eep_
—
2006-03-05T12:17:50Z —
#3

Um, how else to find a 3D engine than to compare it to others? Comparison shopping is nothing new and applies just as easily to 3D engines as it does to any product.

Methulah
—
2006-03-06T06:18:11Z —
#4

Not really, a lot of features of a 3D engine are not needed, or needed to a slight extent. The 3D engine database provides a good list of all of the those features and allows one to select an engine that they feel has the features they want, rather than one which is, for example, more "powerful" (which in itself is hard to define) than another.

Take for example, the F.E.A.R Engine (modified Jupiter EX if I recall correctly). It may be better when compared to the Battlefield 1942 engine, but if one wants to make a game that has vast outdoor extenses, they would want inbuilt terrain rendering (which if the F.E.A.R Engine was purpose built would not be apparent)and the Battlefield Engine would be more suited, thus a comparative list would only be misleading.

I say the engine database is good how it is. Also, I found your database, while somwhat informative, incomplete and confusing.

Not really, a lot of features of a 3D engine are not needed, or needed to a slight extent. The 3D engine database provides a good list of all of the those features and allows one to select an engine that they feel has the features they want, rather than one which is, for example, more "powerful" (which in itself is hard to define) than another. Take for example, the F.E.A.R Engine (modified Jupiter EX if I recall correctly). It may be better when compared to the Battlefield 1942 engine, but if one wants to make a game that has vast outdoor extenses, they would want inbuilt terrain rendering (which if the F.E.A.R Engine was purpose built would not be apparent)and the Battlefield Engine would be more suited, thus a comparative list would only be misleading.

But if the engine had a note about terrain/outdoor capabilities a comparison would reveal that feature too. I have that feature in my 3D game comparison table.@Methulah

I say the engine database is good how it is. Also, I found your database, while somwhat informative, incomplete and confusing.

Confusing how? It's not meant to be a comprehensive 3D engine comparison, but just what effects I've noticed over the years. Yes, there could be a lot more technical things like BSP, etc, but I don't think that's quite relevant--that's where your database comes in (and why I suggested a merge).

Methulah
—
2006-03-07T06:23:21Z —
#6

No, it's just that I find the database confusing in the way it's layed out. It seems like it is hard to get at the information you want. I understand it is about that games, not the engines, but I find it difficult to (for instance) compare Half-Life to Jedi Knight 2.

Eep_
—
2006-03-07T06:26:10Z —
#7

Oh, yes, that's because it's NOT a database (yet) but just a table I manually created. I WANT to make it a database so specific games/features CAN be compared...

Methulah
—
2006-03-09T22:13:45Z —
#8

Well, good luck to you then.

FlamingHawk
—
2006-03-14T19:13:20Z —
#9

Yes, good luck

Engine comparison is not what the 3D engines database is for, and it's also unethical

darqSHADOW
—
2006-03-14T20:28:05Z —
#10

You also end up comparing apples to oranges that way. Take for example Torque vs TV3D -- these two are the #1 and #2 engines on the list. Torque is a game engine, with a built-in scripting system. TV3D is an SDK, and requires programming. Which is better? Depends on what you need, and what you want. Can you program using Torque? Sure, but you have to modify the core. Can you script with TV3D? Sure, but you need to choose your own scripting language and tie it into your framework. Can they be directly compared? Not really, as they are both targetting different markets.

You also end up comparing apples to oranges that way. Take for example Torque vs TV3D -- these two are the #1 and #2 engines on the list. Torque is a game engine, with a built-in scripting system. TV3D is an SDK, and requires programming. Which is better? Depends on what you need, and what you want. Can you program using Torque? Sure, but you have to modify the core. Can you script with TV3D? Sure, but you need to choose your own scripting language and tie it into your framework. Can they be directly compared? Not really, as they are both targetting different markets.

Um, you just compared them, silly. Apples and oranges are fruit but they are still not completely the same. Hence, they can still be compared. In fact, ANYTHING can be compared if it even has the SLIGHTEST bit of difference. Why? Because comparison isn't just limited to SIMILIARITIES but also apples to DIFFERENCES as well. Fine, so some engines have an SDK and others can only script. That's is but ONE of MANY aspects of engines so do mindlessly say the other aspects can't be compared is just silly and incorrect.

Methulah
—
2006-03-16T09:11:31Z —
#13

Look, I think what darqSHADOW was saying is that apples and oranges are so dissimillar (as a TGE and TV3D) that it would be futile. Sure, he just compared them, but anyone intersted can glean that information within seconds from the 3D engine database or they would already know.

Maybe for the average gamer, a set of features isn't enough and they need comparison so that they have someting to relate to. Remember that the 3D Engine database is aimed at developers, people who know the function of engine and know what they need. They need certain features, not "an engine similar to Quake 3".

Eep_
—
2006-03-16T09:45:30Z —
#14

What's futile to you may not be futile to someone else, Meth. Apples and oranges are more similar than they are dissimilar. Just because this database is aimed at developers doesn't mean all developers are created equally (that's for sure!) and know everything there is to about 3D engines. Hence the comparison database in the first place! How do you know a developer isn't looking for an engine similar to Quake 3? Why limit your database and make it hard to use when it could be easier to use and used by MORE developers (casual AND seasoned)? You only limit yourself with that kind of narrow-minded thinking.

Methulah
—
2006-03-17T23:55:03Z —
#15

I still don't think you understand. A 3D game cannot be made by someone who doesn't know these features. Developers don't have to know everything there is to know about an engine (even the engine's developers don't know that), but if they want to select the best engine for their project, they need to know about engine features. There are many sites they can use to learn (and after all, that's what it's all about), but they will need this knowledge if they are to usefully and productfully use their engine.

Why would a developer be looking for an engine similar to quake 3. Why not looking for one that as fast BSP rendering, is GPL has render-to-texture and texture mapping. They might not want it to be OpenGL, so they run a search for those features in DirectX. Rather than clicking Quake 3 and selecting "engines similar" which is never going to do justice to the diversity of engine fatures and intended purposes.

About apples and oranges. What do they have in common. They are fruit, they stimulate the taste buds that recieve sweet taste. Apart from that? Not a whole lot. Dissimiar? Oranges are round, oranges contain citric acid, orange skins are generally not regarded as edible, apple pips are brown, oranges are orange, whilst apples can vary in colour, a green apple may be ripe, whereas a green orange is unripe. I could go on a for a lot longer, but I hope you get my point. Also, I'm sorry to continue the analogy, but there you go.

Anyway, I think there is a place for your comparison and a place for the 3D Engine Database, I just don't think that place is together.

Anyway, I think there is a place for your comparison and a place for the 3D Engine Database, I just don't think that place is together.

I don't know if that's specifically true. While I know what Eep² wants to do is quite a bit different from the purpose of the database here, there is a marginal bit of truth to what Eep² says.

To be able to have a side by side comparison of two or more engines would be useful. Check the boxes next to the engines you want to see and they both show up side by side to compare. I think it is unneccesary, but it would be handy. I also think it might be very helpful to have a way to check multiple features to bring up all the engines that support those features. Getting a list of all engines with "x" is fine, but getting a list of all engines with "x" & "y" would be :cool2:.

:yes:

Methulah
—
2006-03-22T06:02:47Z —
#17

Try the "advanced search" option in the 3D engine database. It allows you to display all engines with any amount of features. That way you can get engines that have the whole alphabet!

Eep_
—
2006-03-22T06:08:18Z —
#18

A mostly useless display, however. At least have a way to compare multiple engines in a table or something. Mindlessly showing all engine stats at once in a long page is annoying, too. At least put the engine names in a list that can be clicked to go to the appropriate engine...

Methulah
—
2006-03-22T10:41:47Z —
#19

It does. At least you should use the engine database before bashing it. The advanced search feature generated a list of the engines that match the features you chose, with some additional content, depicting the basic features of that engine. Then, you are free to click on the name and go to a more in-depth page with images.

Remember, choosing an engine isn't an everyday thing. A person might do it twice in their lifetime, it doesn't need to be simplified of quick.

Eep_
—
2006-03-22T11:17:14Z —
#20

\ You just don't understand, Meth. I am talking about JUST listing the engine NAMES with NO details. Have YOU used YOUR engine? It's quite a pain-in-the-ass to search and use, actually. It DESPERATELY needs better presentation...